**DLMS FINANCE PRC AGENDA ITEMS**

**20 May 2008**

**1000 Start**

**2750 Prosperity Avenue Suite 300**

**Fairfax, VA 22031**

As of:  7/27/2017 9:54 AM

**OPEN ITEMS FROM FINANCE PRC MEETING OF 13 NOVEMBER 2007 (****See Link****)**

1. **XML/EDI Transaction Standards.**

a. Sandra Bryant of BTA was to discuss with BTA leadership the need to standardize information exchanges to achieve compliance with the Standard Financial Management Structure.

1) STATUS 04.01. 2008. BTA is still researching this.

2. **Inter-Service Obligation.**

a. Buz Sawyer (DLA) was to research whether the Common Food Management System (CMFS) would use an 821 EDI Transaction for obligation and, if so, draft a Proposed DLMS Change to use that 821 transaction as a standard for DOD.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008. CFMS is not using the 821 EDI Transaction.

b. Ronnie Daniels (Army) was to determine if Army is ready to staff Draft PDC 266 regarding the obligation transaction, and, if so, arrange for a briefing at the next FPRC.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008. Status pending.

3. **DLMS MILSBILLS Manual Updates.**

a. Patricia Davis had indicated that a change to MILSBILLS might be needed to address the Financial Management Regulation (FMR), Volume 4, Chapter 3 issue of not performing reimbursable work for Federal Agencies more than 90 days in arrears in payment of previous bills.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008. Since this requirement is stipulated in FMR Patricia concluded that no change to MILSBILLS was needed.

b. Susan Scott (USAF) was to draft a PDC for use of fund code XP for non-interfund billing.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008. Susan drafted a rough PDC for consideration, which is attached. Susan has accepted another position, and a replacement has not been named.

4. **812L, 812R and 810L EDI Transactions.**

a. Bob Hammond DLMSO was to evaluate these transactions to ensure consistency and draft a PDC to correct discrepancies.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008.  See PDC 287.

5. **DLA (S9M) Billings on Medical Service Contracts Via Interfund.**

a. ****DLA has been billing via the Interfund for maintenance contracts, which does not allow for ensuring that receiving reports are in hand prior to making progress payments. Buz Sawyer, DLA, says that DSCP indicates that they are still using the Interfund process to bill customers for "services”.  In one example, DSCP bills the customer for medical equipment yearly maintenance services.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008. Buz wants to discuss this matter at the next FPRC.

6. **FAA RIC PROBLEM.**

a. Per Susan Scott some FAA billings have RIC 570 vice RIC G69.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008. Discuss at the next FPRC.

7. **MILS Migration Status**

a. DLMSO is aware that DLA EBS (formerly BSM) is using the 810 and 812 transactions.  The ILS-S/SBSS Air Force, LMP Army, and Marine Corps systems at Albany, Georgia, are currently making system changes to migrate to the DLMS with implementations beginning in March and ending in the fall of 2008.  BTA has been providing seed funding for implementing DLMS transactions through a competitive nomination “Jump Start” process, which is planned to continue through 2013. This topic will be discussed at the next FPRC. Also, Mark Johnson, (Navy) will provide status on Navy plans to implement DLMS financial transactions.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008. The current design of Navy ERP (NERP) is to use DLMS 810 for sending the interfund bills to VISTA.  It will be the responsibility of DAASC to translate the billing transactions from DLMS to DLSS (old format MILS) and provide them to VISTA for processing. NERP does not anticipate using the 812R Logistics Bill Adjustment Request or the 812L Logistics Bill Adjustment Reply. 

8. **Fund Code Validation on FMS Requisitions.**

a. ADC 20, which has been incorporated into Chapter 9 of MISBILLS, specifies mandatory use rules for the Fund Code.  Subsequent to implementation, DAASC excluded FMS from the logic due to reported problems with Army and Air Force transactions.  The AF scenario was described as a prerequisition inquiry from the ILCO to obtain the correct source of supply from DAASC.  DLMSO requested that the AF document this process; however, since this is not an actual requisition a waiver for ADC 20 may not be required.  The Army scenario involves requisitions used by FMS customers to purchase major end items.  DLMSO requested that the Army document this process and request an exception from ADC 20 business rules.  The Navy did not identify any comparable issues with ADC 20 implementation.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008.  The Army (Ronnie Daniels, Sarah Cook and Kathy Heikel) indicate that a change to their CISIL program is being implemented to allow Army to comply with ADC 20. An implementation date is pending.  Air Force (Bobby Zoelich, and Kay Daly) are working on documenting the USAF process. 

9. **Air Force Billing Problems Resulting from Partial Shipments.**

a. This issue came up in the Supply PRC, but it also has financial implications.  Since DSS confirms based on partial shipments, and DLA EBS bills based on these confirmations, (ARO) vice the material release order (A5_), the possibility exists that some bills will appear as duplicate billings. These bills don't contain suffixes on the document numbers, and the Air Force finance system considers the same document number with the same quantity a duplicate.  This is causing a lot of manual work, and is increasing the bill processing charge from DFAS to the Services. Air Force indicates that this is a problem for them, but Army has indicated that it is not a problem for them. Some possible solutions include (1)Fix EBS not to bill until the shipment is complete; (2) Change DFAS systems to accommodate partial billings by accumulating the billed dollar amount so that bills based upon partial shipments are not rejected unless the total dollars exceeds the amount obligated. (3) In DLMS add the TCN to the bill or add a partial shipment indicator for future use. 

b. ADC 247 provides some background.  Karen Brunnell (DFAS DE, replaced by Zenaida Westbrook) indicated that she will see if a systems change based upon solution (2) above can be accomplished by Air Force to resolve this problem.  Ms. Hilert, DLMSO, reported that the process identified in (2) above is currently used by the Army, and it appears the Army is not having a billing problem for partial shipments.  Ronnie Daniels (Army Representative) will confirm this.  Mark Johnson, representing Navy, indicated that he will check to see if the Navy is having a similar problem.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008 Status pending.

10. **Treasury Suspense Account Elimination.**

a. Treasury is eliminating suspense accounts starting *F3875 and **F3885.  MILSBILLS uses **F3885 (.2000) to place interfund bills/details in suspense when no due-in or obligation exists.  We need to discuss how we want to address this and document any required changes to DOD 4000.25-7-M.  Interfund has established an In-Transit account for similar uses.  Karen Brunnell (DFAS Denver replaced by Zenaida Westbrook) will clarify if anything needs to be documented in DoD 4000.25-7-M.

1) STATUS 04.01.2008. See PDC 310.

11. **PDC 284 Product Quality Deficiency Report (PQDR/Supply Discrepancy Report (SDR/Transportation Discrepancy Report TDR) Credit Tracking**

a. a.****This change to MILSBILLS will allow for better tracking of credits for PQDRs, SDRs and TDRs. There is currently no way to easily capture PQDR/SDR/TDR credits from a financial aspect.  There are general codes that exist to capture PQDR/SDR/TDR credits, but they need to be more specific. Capturing these codes on the detail billing record will allow instantaneous identification of a PQDR/SDR/TDR credit issue.

1) STATUS PDC 284 was approved and a Request for Implementation Date (RFID) was issued. Thus far DLA has responded with an implementation date of 10/01/2009 and Navy has responded with an implementation date of 02/01/2010. Can we implement earlier than that with staggered implementation?

**NEW AGENDA ITEMS**

12. **Standard Financial Information Structure (SFIS) Briefing** (Raymond Bombac, BTA)

13. **Jump Start Briefing******(Dale Yeakel, DLMSO)

14. **GSA-Directed Shipments Lost at DLA-Operated Consolidation and Containerization Point (CCP)**.

a. GSA directs vendor shipment to customers through the DLA CCPs.  If material is lost and GSA has transporter proof of delivery (TPD) from the vendor neither the vendor nor GSA will reimburse the customer. DLA has no policy/process to provide credit for CCP losses. GSA does not accept responsibility for CCP losses.

Break Time